On Wed, Nov 6, 2013 at 5:57 PM, Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro <salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro@gmail.com> wrote:
Dear All,
These are my questions for Fadi, Theresa et al.
1)The meeting that ICANN had with Brazil was designed to discuss the Summit in Rio, in the CEO's mind when he was talking about the Internationalisation of ICANN did he mean:
a) change of oversight from the US, via IANA, DoC to one under a global framework (treaty or otherwise - of more pluralism in architecture);
I can't speak for ICANN of course, but I do not see the need for a treaty or other "multilateral" mechanism. There are 2 things that are upsetting folks; 1) the NTIA role in authorising changes to the root. This one is relatively easy to solve, and to be blunt the GAC already has more "power" to say what goes in the root than NTIA. The GAC can give "advice" that says in essence "thou shalt not put Amazon in the rootzone" for example, but NTIA can only say "yes, IANA followed their own procedures in making this rootzone change". The ICANN BoD already passes resolutions telling IANA to delegate (or re-delegate) certain strings, so I think they could easily take on the role of NTIA in ratifying whether or not IANA followed their own processes. After all, the ICANN BoD ratifies global IP addressing policy in the same way (did the ASO follow their own process or not). 2) the fact that ICANN has a contract to run IANA from the USG. This one is harder of course due to political issues in the USA. It may be easier after the NTIA role in re: rootzone changes is shifted tot the ICANN BoD however. -- Cheers, McTim "A name indicates what we seek. An address indicates where it is. A route indicates how we get there." Jon Postel